Truths suppressed by the Establishment and society generally, and analytical overviews of reality to deepen understanding. All contents copyrighted. Brief quotations with attribution and URL [jasonzenith.blogspot.com] permitted.
Check out my other blog at taboo-truths.blogspot.com

Friday, July 26, 2013

GEORGE ZIMMERMAN IS WANTED FOR GETTING
AWAY WITH MURDER IN THE EXECUTION-STYLE SLAYING OF TEENAGER TRAYVON
MARTIN.

ZIMMERMAN IS A SELF-STYLED NEIGHBORHOOD
GUARDIAN AND BURGLARY-AVENGER WHO STALKED, CONFRONTED, AND KILLED
MARTIN, WHO WAS WALKING TO HIS FATHER'S RESIDENCE IN SANFORD,
FLORIDA.

ZIMMERMAN IS CONSIDERED ARMED AND
DANGEROUS. EXERCISE EXTREME CAUTION WHEN HE IS APPROACHING YOU.

ZIMMERMAN'S ACCOMPLICE IN EVADING
JUSTICE IS ANGELA B. COREY, A FLORIDA PROSECUTOR WITH A HISTORY OF
POLITICIZED PROSECUTIONS. COREY IMPRISONED AN ABUSED WOMAN NAMED
MARISSA ALEXANDER FOR TWENTY YEARS FOR FIRING A WARNING SHOT AT HER
MALE ATTACKER WHO WAS IN VIOLATION OF AN ORDER OF PROTECTION.

THE PUBLIC IS CAUTIONED TO AVOID THESE
TWO DANGEROUS CRIMINALS IF AT ALL POSSIBLE. ANYONE WHO ENCOUNTERS
THESE FUGITIVES FROM JUSTICE OR HAS INFORMATION ABOUT THEM IS URGED
TO BECOME POLITICALLY ACTIVE.

Tuesday, July 23, 2013

The mind-numbing ABC chatter show aimed at dullard housewives, The View, has hired crank comedian and past nudie model Jenny McCarthy as a co-host, from which perch she will promote her anti-vaccine views. (She is convinced her son's autism was caused by a vaccination.)

The Pakistani terrorist commander Adnan Rasheed, while "explaining" why they targeted for assassination a 15-year-old schoolgirl who they shot in the head (Malala Yousafza, who survived and is now 16), reiterated the Taliban's conviction that vaccination is a U.S. plot to sterilize people. (Which is why they keep murdering Pakistani vaccination workers, mostly young women. These guys are not very chivalrous!)

I was thinking, why not get Rasheed on The View also? His demented anti-vaccination "views" would complement McCarthy's perfectly. (Indeed, they would make hers look moderate by comparison. Plus, people would be too busy attacking ABC for putting a Taliban terrorist on to bother objecting to McCarthy. It's a double win for ABC!)

Thursday, July 18, 2013

The world has just been favored with an
explanation for why the Pakistani Taliban shot Pakistani schoolgirl
Malala Yousafzai in the head October 2012 after waylaying her
schoolbus, nearly killing her. This comes from a “commander” by
the name of Adnan Rasheed.

It seems it wasn't because of
her advocacy for girls' merely being allowed to go to school, as has
been so maliciously reported. It was because she “smeared” the
Taliban, Adnan enlightens us.

Oh OK then! That's different! Why
didn't you say so in the first place! It's perfectly reasonable
to murder schoolgirls who say things about you that you don't like.
Go right ahead and shoot some more of them. What better way to prove
you aren't violent, repressive, totalitarian thugs than to
assassinate girls on their way home from school to make the point
that no one should say that's exactly what you are!

In fact, they also singled out two of
her classmates in the same attack. (Malala has since turned 16, no
thanks to the Islamofascists who tried to murder her.)

Apparently this little clarification is
a PR move in reaction to brave Malala's recent UN address. She has
inspired people around the world. (Inspired in a positive way, unlike
the nihilistic inspiration the Islamofascists apparently evoke in
assorted schlubs, losers, and vicious jackasses with demented dreams
of power.) By the way, goons like Rasheed make Pakistan too dangerous for Malala and her family to live there anymore.

This vicious turd Rasheed isn't merely
some tribal militant. He's a former member of the Pakistani Air
Force. Which once again shows that it's splitting hairs to
distinguish between the Pak military and its terrorist spawn, which
they created as their cat's paw. Although lately it's a bit of a
Frankenstein's monster story, with the beast getting harder for its creators to
control. The best thing we can hope for is that the terrorists and
the Pakistani army kill as many of each other as possible. (And if
there was ever a good reason to consider a preemptive nuclear strike,
maybe one on the Pakis nuclear arsenal and delivery vehicles would be
in order. Unlike the fantasy nukes of Iraq prior to the U.S. invasion, or of Iran, these nukes actually exist.)

By the way, Rasheed the Reasonable was
convicted for trying to assassinate Pervez Musharraf in 2003, when
that general was president of Pakiland.

So why isn't he in prison, you might
well ask?

He was, actually, But he “escaped” last year. Along with
three hundred of his fellow prisoners, who “escaped” at
the same time.

How could that be? And how could they
all get away?

Why don't you ask the Pakis? Just
remember, you'll be asking the same sleazy liars who claim they had
no idea Osama bin Laden was living right under their noses
all those years in the military garrison townof Abbottabad,
where he'd built a large, secretive compound. I mean, it's easy
to miss something like that.

The Pakis are so duplicitous it seems
they've outfoxed themselves and are simultaneously fighting and
sponsoring their own terrorists. That can get confusing!

Come to think of it, maybe it's karmic
justice that the liars of the U.S. Imperium have to deal with the
sleazy liars of Pakistan. Just about every day now, the secret police
apparatchiks of the Obama regime have to admit they told yet another
lie to the U.S. Congress about their massive surveillance programs. (The NSA has so many different compartmented spy programs it's a wonder they can keep track of them all themselves.)

That's right, they even lie to their
own national legislature. (And then when they're caught massively
spying on everyone on earth, the regime apparatchiks, from Obama on
down, all purr at us Not to Worry, Congress oversees all the spying
that Congress doesn't even know about.)

Hey, everybody does it, right? Lies to
their legislatures? That must mean it's okay. Just like corruption,
say, or insider trading, is okay if “everybody” does it.

Whoops! Not quite. The Obama regime
prosecutes corruption and insider trading. In fact, the U.S. Attorney
for part of New York State, Preet Bharara, is currently on a
years-long jihad against both those things, targeting state
politicians and Wall Street traders.

I guess the “everybody does it”
alibi only works for people with a lot of power, like Obama,
who just invoked it to justify the NSA's spying on U.S. allies.
Doesn't work for mere state politicians or financial speculators.

{Is this you? Sitting at your computer all day, every
few minutes navigating to jasonzenith.blogspot.com because you hunger for the
latest insights from Jason Zenith? Desperately checking over and
over, while a sense of forlorn futility slowly grows inside you like
a lethal tumor?

Why put yourself through that when you don't have to?
Well now, you don't! All you have to do is follow by email at, uh,
“Follow By Email.” (Makes sense.) You'll find it at the top right
corner of the page. Just go there- it's to the right of the title of
the top post- and follow the easy-to-understand instructions. There's even a "subscribe" option!!

But let's just say, for argument's sake, that this isn't
you. Maybe you don't spend all your days constantly checking
on Jason Zenith's website, for some reason. (We won't ask why; it's not for us to delve into your
idiosyncracies.) So what? You can still
sign up for alerts, or subscribe, and for exactly the same price as those sufferers
we mentioned before- namely free. So why not? It's not like it's
costing you anything. It's free. I mean, how cheap do
you have to be to notsign up? It's free, I told you.
Freee. You don't have to pay, O-KAAY? So
what's your excuse now? You like giving people a hard time
or something? Go on, just do it and then you won't have to put
up with me bugging you about it!}

Wednesday, July 17, 2013

Every day the NYT is an
unauthorized recipient of “classified information.” The NYT
people have no “security clearances,” therefore they are by
definition unauthorized recipients. They also aid and abet
government officials who commit criminal violations of the
various “classified information” laws that enforce state secrecy,
as well as the Espionage Act. [These are the same laws that prevent
the handful of Congresspeople who have pseudo-”oversight” duties
for the “intelligence community” (secret police combine) from
saying anything about what's going on, even to the rest of Congress.
Which doesn't stop liars from Obama on down and their media stooges
from constantly repeating the lie that “Congress oversees” all
the massive spying the secret police and military do. Hardly.]

Here's an example from the Sunday paper
(July 14th), although you can find examples everysingle day.

The first
paragraph sources the story to “American officials,” who “said”
on “Saturday” that Israel bombed some antiship cruise missiles in
Syria last month that Russia had just shipped.

The second
paragraph says “The officials, who declined to be identified
because they were discussing intelligence reports, said the attack
occurred...” blah blah. Of course, the “intelligence reports”
would be “classified,” and the “officials” were committing
a crime by telling the NYT about them, which explains why
they “declined to be identified,” that is, why the NYT
agreed to keep their identities secret. In fact, by the U.S.
Government's lights, they committed numerous crimes, including
violating their signed agreements not to divulge “classified”
information. [1]

Every day, the NYTaids and
abets these government criminals by conspiring with them
to receive these unauthorized releases of classified information to
reporters and editors without security clearances, and to hide the
identities of these lawbreakers who are guilty of “unauthorized
disclosure of classified/national defense information” and of
violating the Espionage Act (as it is currently “interpreted” by
the Obama regime, with the complicity of the Federal courts and their
politically repressive judges).

But get this. Some of the government
lawbreakers who want former “National Security” Agency contractor
and hero whistleblower Edward Snowden's head on a pike are committing
the exact samecrimes they accuse him
of. [See “NSA Whistle-Blower Edward Snowden: Hero Or Villain?”]

And obviously it's not just the NYT.
It's the Washington Post, it's the various TV channels, it is
the multifarious organs of the corporate media propaganda system that
is doing this.

The very same corporate propaganda
organs that violate U.S. law daily (by the Obama regime theory that
wiretapped the AP and Fox News as being involved in criminal
conspiracies, and the media theory that says WikiLeaks and others are
criminals) and that aid and abet lawbreaking (a separate
crime) by government criminals periodically float the idea or even
openly call for criminal prosecutions of WikiLeaks, Julian Assange,
and even Guardian columnist and reporter Glenn Greenwald, who
Snowden has given his information to.

All this goes well beyond an issue of
selective prosecution. Well beyond a contradiction. Well beyond mere
hypocrisy.

This is the rankest cynicism by the
power bosses, in the government, and in elements of the corporate
media, such as the revolting David Gregory of NBC, who challenged
Glenn Greenwald to explain why he shouldn't be clapped into prison.

Actually David Gregory should be in
prison. He is an accomplice in major crimes against humanity.

1] “Israel
Airstrike Targeted Advanced Missiles That Russia Sold to Syria, U.S.
[SIC] Says,” Michael R, Gordon, New York Times, Sunday, July
14th, 2013, page 10. I like the way lawbreaking government
officials ARE The Nation, the “U.S.” Now that's authority!
We are the state! Sounds like
a monarchy, doesn't it?

Monday, July 15, 2013

In Syria,
the messianic and power-mad maniacs proclaiming themselves “The
Islamic State of Iraq In The Levant” are systematically seizing
territory and control from the loose and disorganized indigenous
Syrian rebels, who call themselves the “Free Syrian Army.” (A
title that puts a good face on something that is not an army, is not
even a single organized entity, but rather refers to a loose
coalition of numerous ad hoc bands of mostly civilians with
some military veterans and deserters from Assad's army who have been
forced by violent repression to take up arms against an intolerable
regime. They are united by the cause of overthrowing Assad and
nothing more.) In no less than five “incidents” in the last week,
the Islamisoids are aggressively trying to seize control of areas of
Syria wrested from the Assad regime by the Syrian rebels, in effect
attacking the uprising itself and stealing the hard-won fruits of the
rebels' paid-for-in-blood victories. (The same thing they did in
northern Mali, when they elbowed aside the Tuareg rebels and grabbed
half of Mali away from them.) [1]

Thus do the Islamisoids play into the
hands of the Assad regime in two ways: they weaken the rebellion and
put it under impossible military pressure, and they provide evidence
for the Assad propaganda line that the uprising is a bunch of foreign
jihadi terrorists coming into the country. It also reinforces the
Assad warning that the only alternative to him is another Islamist
state like Afghanistan under the Taliban. (Après
moi, le déluge,
has been one of Assad's
propagandathemes,
designed to resonate with Western ears.) His pals in Iran
aren't an example of an Islamist state, in this propaganda schema. Of
course the two regimes are different flavors of Islamic theocracy,
Iran being ruled by Shiites, the Taliban being Sunni. Elements of
those two religious strains are busy blowing up each others'
adherents in Iraq at the moment.

In Iraq, the latest bombings of
mosques and cafes kill the observant and those trying to enjoy life.
No claims of responsibility, but suspicion falls on sectarian
fanatics and Al-Qaeda, (which in Iraq dubs itself “Al-Qaeda in
Mesopotamia”), resurgent and boastful of late there. (These “holy
warriors” aren't so respectful of Islam to refrain from regularly
bombing mosques and blowing up processions and busloads of religious
pilgrims. Apparently it's not religion but blasphemy if it's not the
EXACT DOGMA of the killers.) During the current month so Ramadan,
terrorism by Sunni and Shiite “militants” against targets of the
other community, including mosques, funerals, and cafes, has
increased. A suicide bomber- hallmark of Al-Qaeda- blew himself up in
a coffee shop in Kirkuk, killing 39 people for the crime of existing.
Since the start of April, over 2,600 people have been slaughtered in
terrorist attacks of all kinds in Iraq, almost the same as the 2,900
death toll of “9/11.”

In Nigeria, the boss of Boko
Haram, his very own Islamofascist terrorist gang, issued yet another
of his countless denunciations of what he calls “western
education.” (Boko Haram means “western education is forbidden.”
Does that make their demented obsession clear enough for you?
“Western education” apparently includes, reading, writing,
arithmetic, all those awful foreign UnIslamic poisons.)

He hailed a recent murderous attack on
a school dormitory by his goons, who set it on fire, killing 28
students and a teacher. (That'll teach them to stay away from
“western education!”)

The Islamofascists are maniacs with a
method to their madness. They are power opportunists who roam areas
of the globe from Africa, through the middle east, all the way to the
Philippines and Indonesia, seeking areas of advanced governmental rot
and decay (or of political upheaval such as Iraq) where they can move
in and seize control, as they recently did in Mali until France sent
in an expeditionary force to stop them from seizing all of Mali.
(They'd grabbed the north of Mali previously, including Timbuktu,
where they engaged in their usual projects of mutilation, murder-
especially of women who they imagine are having sex, and whipping
those whose clothes they disapprove of, yet they aren't too
puritanical to refrain from rape- and the razing of culture by
destroying World Heritage Site shrines, burning ancient manuscripts,
banning music and smashing musical instruments, and generally
imposing their brutal, crude, and stifling mentality by force. The
word “primitive” would do them too much credit. Even primitive
peoples have music, art, and culture. Not like these demonic ghouls,
who seek to eradicate all art and culture and indeed joy from the
lives of others, apparently not content in erasing it from their own.
All they have is a bastardized and corrupt version of Islam, designed
to justify their incredible lust for power- power to destroy what is
uplifting and good, power to make other people miserable with their
insane impositions. Really, even to call them fascist insults
fascists, who had their own totalitarian fascist art and culture. Not
even Hitler sought to eradicate all music- just “Jewish”
compositions and “degenerate negro” music, jazz.)

What a world we live in, blighted with
deranged psychopaths who manage to infect others with their violent
mental disease.

Meanwhile, the U.S. tries to pick off
assorted “militants” who they believe have it in for the U.S.
specifically, with drone attacks. The U.S. has no strategy for
opposing Islamofascism. It only has tactics, applied to
selected countries.

Just because you apply your tactics
around the globe doesn't mean you have a strategy. And a strategy is
desperately needed.

The U.S. has gone from Bush the
Blusterer, who went along with Pakistan's charade of being an “ally”
in the “war on terrorism,” to Obama the Ditherer, tactically
decisive at times (killing Osama bin Laden, a risky mission, killing
Anwar al-Awlaki's 16-year-old son, apparently out of fear of him
becoming a nuisance in the future by raising a stink about the
killing of his father, both U.S. citizens), but strangely aloof and
diffident about crises in Mali, where he could have provided drones
with missiles (not just surveillance drones) to take out the
Islamofascists retreating from the French forces across wide-open
desert, and in Libya, where he insisted on sitting in the backseat of
the effort to support the Libyan people's Arab Spring uprising
against the twisted megalomaniac dictator Qaddafi.

Note the odd inconsistently, It's
necessary to kill a non-Jihadist 16-year-old, and also a retired
veteran of the Afghan war living in Yemen for another example, the
latter case an attack that slaughtered many bystanders and turned an
entire village against the U.S., but the Islamisoids wreaking havoc
across northern and sub-Saharan Africa are only important enough to
motivate Obama to lift a pinkie. I think Obama's political thought
processes might tie him up in knots at times. (A native of that
Yemeni village who lived in America testified before Congress about
the counterproductive effect of that murderous attack, which turned
the villagers, who had been indifferent to the Jihadists' attempts to
sway their opinions about America, into enemies of the U.S. Jeremy
Skahill has also highlighted the bombing in his work, including a
recent documentary. Tactics without strategy leads to such
self-defeating acts.)

Obama thinks that what he's doing, the
tactics, plus changing the rhetoric, is strategy. He says he's
“targeting specific groups,” and he presents that as strategy.
That's merely a description of what he thinks he's doing. And he
wants to retire the “war on terrorism” slogan. That's a
rhetorical move. Rhetorical tweaks, which the hyper-manipulative
Obama is very fond of, aren't strategy either.

Like the U.S. in general- this is true
for its government and its corporations- there seems to be an
inability to thing longer term as opposed to being obsessed with the
immediate. Unfortunately the ones with the long range plans are the
most venal, like the “National Security” Agency, with its
well-laid plans (being executed) for massive, permanent, global,
ubiquitous surveillance. (They just finished their new $2 billion
storage center in Utah where they will stash all the data they plan
on stealing in the future.) Or the FBI, which continues to extend its
tentacles through U.S. society, deploying ever-more-inescapable means
of tracking and surveillance. Their goal is to be able to follow
anyone around in public everywhere they go, via the endless number of
outdoor (and indoor) surveillance camera and facial recognition
software. This will make effective dissent and political organizing
virtually impossible.

For humans on this planet, we are too
often caught between a rock and a hard place. Venal, oppressive
governments (the U.S., Russia, China, and numerous others) and
fanatics driven by demented principles who constitute the most potent
opposition to those nations. The people of Timbuktu epitomize the
dilemma. On the one hand, a useless, corrupt, pseudo-government, and
on the other, barbarian invaders imposing an insane new social order
that is suffocating to human existence.

It certainly adds credence to one of
the arguments of the ardent Second Amendmentites of the U.S. An armed
populace is the only (not sure, but possible) defense against
tyranny. The hapless folk of Timbuktu did not have weapons with which
to defend themselves against the barbarian invasion of Islamisoids,
who outclassed both the naïve Tuareg rebels (their erstwhile allies)
and the feckless Malian “army,” a gang that is only good
for attacking the civilian government of the country. Anti-gun
lefties take note.

1] After repeatedly attacking
and killing Free Syrian Army fighters, the Islamisoids topped it off
by murdering a top commander of the FSA at a “checkpoint” they
conveniently established where they intercepted him. An FSA guy
meanwhile jabbered on Aljazeera that they would be “watching” the
Islamisoids who just murdered one of their leading commanders, and
would “take action” is necessary. Lame, guys. Real lame. You need
to take out the Islamisoids' boss immediately, if at all possible.
(And by “take out” I don't mean go on a date with, or order food
to go at a restaurant. I mean the American slang term for kill.
I explain this term for the benefit of my numerous non-American
readers who may not be familiar with it. And translating that term on
the page no doubt only confused you.)

Sunday, July 14, 2013

I would have preferred to be wrong, but
as usual when I predict something, I was right. I'm an unusually
perspicacious person, although I don't think any unusual
insightfulness was required to predict this outcome- just a passing
familiarity with U.S. history, U.S. courts, the racial caste system
of America, and “white” people, especially Southern whites. The
jury consisted of 5 white women and one “minority.” (Not
otherwise identified in the media reports I've seen, so I'm going to
guess Hispanic, which would have tended to make her identify with the
half-Hispanic George Zimmerman. If she had been black, we could have
expected the media to highlight the fact as if saySee? This is very fair! Now howcan
you question an acquittal? There was A Black on the jury! Same
as with the New York jury that acquitted the cops who shot unarmed
black African immigrant Amadou Diallo nineteen times while he was
standing in the entrance to his own building, minding his own
business. Yeah, they fired 41 shots at him- I guess they're no
marksmen.)

Even with the manslaughter possibility
thrown in to provide a possible compromise verdict, there was no
conviction. This despite the fact that the screaming was obviously
Martin, being held at gunpoint by a ruthless thug, who then coldly
executed him. Martin should have ran, so at least Zimmerman would
have shot him in the back. They after the inevitable acquittal, it
would have been obvious to more people what a travesty this trial is,
what a sham the legal system of the U.S. is. (Especially Florida's,
although this could have happened in almost any state in the U.S.
Maybe not in Vermont.)

As I noted in my previous essay,
[BELOW] the prosecution did a poor job (for example, identifying the
screaming voice on the recording as Trayvon Martin should have been
easy- instead more evidence was presented by the defense claiming it
was Zimmerman screaming frantically for ten or so seconds until the
execution shot rang out than was put on by the prosecution, which
inexplicably failed to use voice print technology). A parade of liars
took the stand for Zimmerman, his family and friends (Zimmerman, a
chronic liar, apparently takes after his family) and even the
detective who initially refused to charge Zimmerman went to bat for
him.

The only reason there was a trial at
all is because of a month of protests and pressure in Florida and all
around the U.S., finally forcing the state to bring charges and do a
half-assed prosecution for show.

The defense deftly turned reality on
its head, blaming what Zimmerman's attorney called “the violence”
on Martin's refusal to go home. (! He was ON his way home, you
infuriating jackass!) Somehow Martin has no right to stand his
ground- even though he was the one being pursued, as he told his
friend on the phone during Zimmerman's stalking of him. This clearly
reveals what the Florida “Stand Your Ground” law really is- it's
a Freedom To Kill Blacks law. In fact, when a black female victim
of domestic violence named Marissa Alexander invoked it when she was
tried for attempted murder for firing warning shots (!) at her male
attacker, a domestic abuser, in Florida last year, her defense failed
and she was sentenced to 20 years in prison. Not for killing anyone,
just for firing shots at someone. But that's a twofer: it isn't just
about racist oppression, it's about sexist oppression, enforcing
women's subordinate and subservient position in society enforced by
male violence backed by the power of the state. (Do an Internet
search on her name and you'll get major media reports on the case.)

So now what? Hopefully Zimmerman will
be sued for civil damages by the Martins, same as O.J. Simpson was
(and found liable for millions in damages to the families of the two
people he gutted like sheep.) Simpson went on to commit an armed
robbery, so there is some justice for him as he now sits in prison
for that. Apparently his sense of personal invincibility emerged
intact with his acquittal for two murders. Talk about overconfident.

There is a possibility of Federal civil
rights charges against Zimmerman, but there isn't much basis for
that. Besides, Obama is always bending over backwards to prove to
whites that he doesn't favor blacks. So in practice Obama has been
anti-black. His Attorney General, the awful Eric Holder Jr., has done
next to nothing to stop the blizzard of voter disenfranchisement laws
passed by state legislatures controlled by Republican, even though
these run afoul of Federal voting rights laws.

There is no militant armed black
organization to put a bullet in Zimmerman's head. Such organizations
are not tolerated. On the other hand, until fairly recently, white
racist terrorist organizations like the Ku Klux Klan were not only
tolerated, they were state sanctioned, and used by the FBI to help
suppress the black civil rights movement. (Just one small example: An
FBI informer Klansman, Gary Rowe, was in the car of Klansman who
chased down and executed Viola Liuzzo, a white northern woman who was
unusually ethical in that she felt an obligation to go south to help
oppressed blacks gain their basic human rights. Rowe may have been
the actual executioner.) Yet just recently the FBI and State of New
Jersey announced a doubling of a multimillion dollar reward for the
capture of Assata Shakur, who was apparently part of the short-lived
and minuscule Black Liberation Army. Shakur has been in exile in
Cuba for about thirty years. Yet the FBI supervisor announcing the
new push to Get Shakur fulminated in an enraged voice about her
“terrorist ideology.” Apparently that was what this ideological
fanatic finds most intolerable about her.

As long as blacks are just shooting
other blacks, as long as black rage is turned inward in community
self-destruction, the establishment can sit smugly by and watch. But
they are prepared to crush with an iron fist any manifestation of
black militancy, armed or unarmed, against the power system.

So was I right about the Zimmerman case
because of correct understanding of reality, or because of some
personality defect on my part? I'm generally regarded as a
“pessimist” and a “cynic.” That may be, although I think I am
more realistic than most people. Their unreasonable optimism, based
on blind hope and willful naivete, makes my realism appear to them as
pessimism.

As for “cynicism,” anyone who calls
out Official Bullshit is branded a cynic. Teachers were calling me
that in school.

Friday, July 12, 2013

I think the killer Zimmerman has a very good chance of beating the rap for stalking and executing (black- which should be irrelevant but which means everything in America) teenager Trayvon Martin in Florida.

For one thing, his defense made a credible evidentiary presentation for reasonable doubt. For example, a parade of friends and relatives of the killer falsely testified that it was Zimmerman screaming his lungs out for help. (Why wouldn't Zimmerman have just run away? Or held Martin at gunpoint? Who is logically going to be the one screaming?)

On the other side, the prosecution was weak. The identity of the screaming voice is a perfect example. Probably voiceprints could have easily established the identity of the person. It is obvious that the prosecution was only undertaken reluctantly- no surprise, as the only reason there was any prosecution at all was due to the political pressure of mass protest.

Florida's "stand your ground" law is basically a license to kill (blacks). The fact that it was the victim, who after trying to get away from Zimmerman, turned and stood his ground, is just another vicious irony of the case.

Tuesday, July 09, 2013

Is there an objective answer to this
question, or is it inescapably subjective?

In a sense, everything is subjective,
that is, dependent on one's perspective. Yet there are degrees of
objectivity and subjectivity. Subjectively, the sun is moving around
the earth. Just look in the sky! Don't you see what it does every
day?

And who could think the world is round?
Isn't it obviously flat?

Yet we are able to gain a truer view of
things by analysis and study. In other words, we move closer to
“absolute” objectivity.

Paradoxically, objectivity is
relative. We cannot obtain absolute objectivity because we
cannot viewexistence from outside of existence, and we
cannot perceive or think anything from outside our ownminds. In other words, we cannot get outside of our minds to
perceive external reality.

But it does NOT follow from that that
all ideas, opinions, and thoughts are equal. The idea that the earth
is flat is not just as valid as the idea that it is round. The
knowledge of the reality that the Holocaust was an actually-occurring
historical event is not on a par in terms of value or
legitimacy with the insistence that the Holocaust is a myth. The fact
that absolute objectivity doesn't exist, and that absolute certainty
is elusive, does not mean there is no truth or falsehood. To
believe that is to enter literal madness.

So we live in a paradoxical state of
existence. But we don't need absolute certainty to live. Being prettysure of many things, and being sure based on intellectually
honest examination of reality, always subject to revision, is good
enough for living.

So is it impossibly subjective to put a
label on Edward Snowden?

Not at all. Not if words have logical
meaning. It is true that one's attitude towards Snowden will
determine how one views him, and thus the words one uses to describe
him. But that attitude, as you will see, is itself rooted in
which value system one is beholden to- a human one or a
power one that elevates the State over the person. [1]

Thus the fundamental
conflict here is between those two value systems- the
human value system, vs. the power value system.

But first we must answer the question:
what is a hero?

I define a hero as someone who
willingly puts themselves at significant risk for the sake of
specific other people or for the greater good. I think that is
the most succinct expression of the fundamental meaning of the word.
Probably the Snowden-haters would agree with that definition of
“hero.”

It cannot be debated that Snowden put
himself, consciously, at risk. Thus the only thing that is arguable
at all here is whether what Snowden did was for “the greater good.”

For anyone who is pro-human, there
really is no argument that it was. Human beings are obviously
entitled to live their lives free of the malevolent monitoring of a
murderous empire, or indeed of any state. Human beings are entitled
to live their lives, which to live decency requires personal privacy.
The NSA and USA are ushering in the nightmare world George Orwell
envisioned in 1984. In that world, an all-powerful state
monitors every action of its subjects down to the minutest detail,
making resistance to its oppression impossible and imposing
compulsory enthusiastic support for its wars.

So there can be no argument in human
terms with the fact that Snowden performed a public good. (The
idea that massive NSA spying is “protecting” its victims is
errant nonsense on its face and I won't dally here refuting it.
Others are refuting it very well.) The argument is with the
oppressors of the U.S. powerestablishment. To them,
their power is the highest good and the most important
thing in existence. Therefore, they have the right to massively
violate the privacy of literally billions of people, to steal and
store in perpetuity all their private communications, to draw social
maps of all their human connections, and to use the information to
target for harm those whose presumptive political beliefs and
activities the power system does not like. (Such as myself.) To them,
anything thatundermines their power is evil. Thus
Snowden, by exposing their crimes, and threatening to generate
opposition to those crimes, is evil.

Let us dispose right now of the
transparently ludicrous and false alibi that this massive, permanent,
total surveillance system is all designed for the sole goal of
“fighting terrorism.” That is the leastsignificant
and smallest part of the massive spying. The far more
important and pervasive purposes are controlling the domestic
population of the U.S. and preemptively targeting for neutralization
potential organizers and dissident leaders; targeting foreign
governments and elites in order to dominate them; targeting foreign
populations, as in Brazil, to aid the fascist and reactionary
forces in those countries- remember, historically the CIA has
provided thousands of names of people to be exterminated to fascist
militaries all over the world, especially in Latin America, Indonesia
under Suharto, Iraq under Saddam Hussein (when the U.S. liked him).
With a massive NSA database at its disposal, now the CIA can murder
more people than ever.[2]

The mavens of the U.S. power
establishment say Snowden should plop himself into their clutches and
“face the consequences of his actions.” In fact he's a coward for
not doing so, is their position.

In other words, to use a war metaphor,
a soldier should throw himself on a live grenade (absent nearby
colleagues who would be at risk).

A soldier in combat doesn't seek to
become a casualty. Likewise he is not a coward for resisting
capture by the enemy.

I'm speaking in the hero context here.
Snowden himself doesn't see the U.S. Government as his enemy,
perhaps. He should, however, because it is his enemy. And the fact
that they are trying to imprison him (for life if not most of his
life) or kill him possibly, should make that obvious to him.

So, objectively, within a
pro-human value system, Snowden is a hero. (Eschewing the
Orwellian-type distortion of vocabulary that the power structure
engages in habitually, where words mean their opposite.) In the power
system value system, he is a “traitor” worthy of death (or,
since people are looking, life in prison). (Maybe down the road they
can kill him.)

The next question becomes; which is the
superior value system?

The creatures who have sold their souls
to the power system of course think that system is superior to a
human value system. Superior because it can impose itself on humans.
In other words, Might Makes Right. Power, being triumphant, is its
own justification. As long as it can successfully oppress humans and
impose itself on the world, that proves its superiority, in their
minds. Plus, they receive the rewards of status, money, and privilege
that comes with prostituting oneself to power. And no, that system
isn't human, it is anti-human, because it systematically attacks and
destroys human rights. Many
others have articulated how this has become blatant in the years
since 9/11/01. The U.S. power establishment has even effectively revoked the 500 year old
right of habeas corpus. (See Chris Hedges and Glenn Greenwald among
others on the human rights holocaust ushered in by the 9/11 attack, the
U.S. equivalent of the Reichstag fire as an excuse for repression.) [3]

As a practical matter, all humans can
do is struggle against the power system. Or accept our “inferiority”
and the “inferiority” of our values. (At least inferior in a
brute, survival of the fittest, natural selection sense. Of course,
the power system is rapidly heading towards ecological disaster,
which will certainly trump any false notions of its “superiority,”)
The people in whom the human impulse is too strong to enable them to
live comfortably as prostitutes to power inevitably sacrifice money,
comfort, status, safety, and security, “irrationally,” as Edward
Snowden quite consciously has done. (Indeed he has even spoken about
giving up the cushy job, how one can just go along with things and
take the money, as most of his former colleagues do.)

Crushing people's spirits with
persecution, repression, torture, imprisonment, solitary confinement,
etc., is designed precisely to make people surrender and accept the
superiority of the power system. This is as true in Iran, or Russia,
or China, or Syria, as in the U.S.

One then has to confront the question
of what is wrong with our species?

While valid, that is a slippery
question which can too easily get vicious criminals off the hook (by
blaming the entire species). Because if everyone is guilty, than no
one is guilty. But I didn't murder six millions Jewish people in
concentration camps. I never owned slaves. I didn't order the atomic
bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I didn't fly planes into the
World Trade Center towers. I'm not assassinating people. I'm not
torturing people. Therefore I do not accept guilt for these crimes,
especially since I inveigh against them at personal cost. (I have
long been unpopular with American secret policemen, who over the
years have expressed their displeasure in the various nasty
underhanded ways available to them.) We must reject the facile
“man's inhumanity to man” pop-psych explanation for war and
atrocity that dissipates guilt from the culprits, makes understanding
impossible by obfuscating political causality, and is ultimately
fatalistic as it says this is human nature, it has always been
this way and always will be. Which is a crock, since in fact the
world is always changing, societies and civilizations and
cultures are not the same as they were a century ago, five hundred
years ago, or two millenniums ago.

So while the Mick Jagger sang “I
shouted out, who killed the Kennedys, when after all, it was you and
me,” I reply, BULLSHIT, you money-grubbing prancer. (“Sympathy
for the Devil,” the Rolling Stones.) Just his little contribution
to the never-ending establishment coverup of those particular CIA
assassinations, I guess. Another accessory after the fact.. That
lyric is just a low-brow version of the Everyone is Guilty line that
shields evildoers.

1] That of course assumes
sincerity on the part of the haters who are reviling Snowden. I'm
sure many of them are sincere. Hitler too was sincere. Sincerity
isn't necessarily a virtue. It is also probable that among the chorus
of establishment. propagandists and politicians heaping opprobrium
upon Snowden are some real cynics who are carrying out a mission as
part of their duties as members of the power structure and who would
just as readily praise him if the establishment line of the day was
to do that. In other words, their attitude may be a facile adaptation
to what particular strategy or tactic of the day the power structure
has fixed on for the moment.

2] The U.S. helped install a
fascist military dictatorship in Brazil in 1965. Currently the
president of Brazil is a former revolutionary who was tortured by
that U.S.-backed dictatorship. Sounds like a strong motive for the
U.S. to target Brazil and lay the groundwork for another fascist coup
and wave of repression. By spying on the entire Brazilian population,
the NSA generates a database for the CIA to target more people for
torture and murder than ever before.

3] In point of fact,
the U.S. didn't fundamentally change after 9/11. All that happened
was that it got worse than it had been in the previous couple of
decades. But looking at U.S.
history, there is no time when repression of progressive dissent and
movements such as black civil rights, labor organizing, and
resistance to Imperialist wars was not the norm.

The
U.S. has always been an enemy of human rights, as the historical
record amply proves. It is an empire founded on the twin pillars of
genocide and slavery, which expanded through military conquest
starting with its failed attempt to seize territory from present day
Canada in 1812! Unfortunately its propaganda is so effective that
fools actually believe it was founded on democratic principles and is
the freest country on earth and a liberator of mankind. Actual facts
bound off their brainwashed brains like pellets hitting armor plates.

Monday, July 08, 2013

Well that was quick. The first year of
democracy in Egypt's 5,000-plus year history has been brought to an
end by a military coup that its backers, including the Obama regime,
insists wasn't a coup. DULY ELECTED president Mohamed Morsi of the
Muslim Brotherhood is now being held incommunicado as a prisoner of
the army. [“For his own protection” is the line of the military
regime and its lackeys, such as the Egyptian ambassador to Britain,
who was given kid glove treatment by the BBC today, defending the
closing down of Muslim Brotherhood media outlets to stop “hate
speech,” defending a large massacre by the military of Morsi
supporters by pretending it was self-defense by the military, with no
pushback by the BBC interviewer at all.]

The sore losers of the presidential
election were elated by the military coup.

The talking point of anti-Morsi
propagandists (they're all over the U.S. media, various well-to-do
Egyptians living in the U.S., citizens of whatever country) is that
it was an “impeachment.” Oh.

No, it was a military coup. And
impeachment (removal by an elected legislature) doesn't involve
imprisonment by the military.

Mohamed El Baradei, a man I formerly
admired for refusing to be a U.S. flunky when he headed the
International Atomic Energy Agency, the UN body tasked with
inspecting Iran's nuclear program where he insisted on playing it
straight, has shamed himself by parroting the “not a coup, an
impeachment” line, and letting his name be floated as a military
puppet replacement for Morsi. El Baradei could have stepped up the
plate and ran in the elections a year ago, but copped out at the
time.

Obama has studiously avoided saying the
word “coup.” He thinks that if he doesn't say the word, it wasn't
a coup. One big part of His Slipperiness' reason for his latest
disingenuous dishonesty is that legally the U.S. isn't supposed to
funnel military aid to militaries that overthrow their governments.
Not to worry: the U.S. breaks its own laws all the time. Only the
rest of us have to obey their laws- or go to prison for ten, twenty,
thirty, forty, one hundred fifty years. (Bernard Madoff's sentence-
yes, the U.S. and its various states meted out sentences of several
lifetimes to people- even several “life sentences” to be served
consecutively. There have been sentences of centuries imposed in
America.)

The reliably pro-fascist Wall Street
Journal is hailing the coup and calling for a “Pinochet”
style regime, as in Chile. That deranged rag constantly sets new lows
for immoral loathsomeness, so no surprise that they would start
grinding one of their favorite ideological axes. They trot out the
usual bogus bullshit about how great Milton Friedmanite economics
are, and makes the absurd claim that Pinochet ushered in democracy.
[Yeah, I know, they're nuts.] Needless to say, no mention of
thousands of murders, torture, international death squads fanning out
all over the globe as far away as Rome and Washington, D.C. under the
dictator Pinochet. (You'd think a terrorist bombing in the U.S.' own
capital city would merit a mention, if not outrage, in a U.S.
propaganda rag- well, think again. I'm referring to the murder of
Orlando Letelier and Ronni Moffitt by Michael Vernon Townley and some
CIA Cuban fascist exile terrorists, on a contract from Pinochet's
secret police, DINA.) [1]

But lest I be misunderstood, I'm not
defending Morsi. It's democracy I care about. Morsi revealed himself
to be power-hungry (no surprise, given the Muslim Brotherhood's years
in the political wilderness) and was unable to deliver the economic
goods to the Egyptians. (That's mostly because of the dire economic
situation he inherited from the dictator Hosni Mubarak.) But he was
elected. Basically the sore losers of the election didn't like his
policies. (Nor do I, being an atheist and someone who believes women
are human beings, same as men, thus fundamentally their “equals”
in terms of innate worth and the rights they should have. But
I don't see the Egyptian military as having a record as sterling
defenders of human rights!)

Even before his
overthrow, Morsi was unable to prevent the sacking and burning of
some of his own party's offices around the country.

The military is the
real state in Egypt. That has been true since Nasser overthrew the
last King in the 1950s. Until Mubarak was ousted, a series of
military dictators has ruled Egypt. With Sadat, Egypt entered the
U.S. camp of stooge nations. In return, the U.S. provides about $2
billion a year in military aid. Meanwhile the Egyptian masses spend
their lives in grinding poverty.

In Latest Defense of
“The People's Will,” Egyptian Army Guns Down 500

The army attacked a crowd of Muslim
Brotherhood supporters just after morning prayers. The crowd had
gathered outside the military facility where Morsi is believed to be
held. About 50 people were killed, including children and infants,
and hundreds wounded.

The Egyptian army claims they were
merely defending themselves from attack. Oppressors the world over
always say that, including in the U.S. The people they brutalize are
always painted as violent attackers. (Sometimes an agent
provocateur or police infiltrator or random anarchist or hothead
will throw a bottle and that is translated into a hail of Molotov
cocktails.)

“We have to cleanse the square of all
of you today.” Egyptian soldier attacking Muslim Brotherhood sit-in
demonstrators as quoted by victim of attack, BBC radio, 7/8/13.

Five children and two babies were among
those murdered. No doubt they were shooting at the military.

*The first unified kingdom of Egypt
dates to around 3,150 BCE. The land itself has been inhabited since
the 10th millennium BCE.

1] This gives me an opportunity
to point out one of tens of thousands of good reasons to be glad that
Newsweek magazine closed down, at least in print, although
that loathsome font of evil lives on on the Internet. A week after
the Letelier assassination, Newsshit published an item on its
“Periscope” page saying that the CIA determined it wasn't
Pinochet who did it. (Of course it was.) How the CIA could know that
in a week anyway wasn't explained. In fact, the CIA helped smuggle
the terrorist bomb maker Townley into the U.S. (Newsweek
was owned until a few years ago by the same clan that owns the
reactionary rag the Washington
Post,
the Graham family.)

A good short article that makes clear the Bush family's ties to terrorism, and other unsavory pardons by Bush the Elder is "Bush's Hypocrisy: Cuban Terrorists," by Robert Parry, at consortiumnews.com

I should mention that G. H.W. Bush's father was closely tied
financially to the Nazis.

What an evil clan.

Kevin Phillips' book on the Bushes is
as good a place to start as any for those who want to lift up the
corporate media's rock of glowing, fawning promotion of the Bushes
and take a look at the slime crawling in the dark. [American
Dynasty: Aristocracy, Fortune, and the Politics of Deceit in the
House of Bush, 2004, out
in paperback and ebook.]

Also see Robert Parry's book Secrecy & Privilege: Rise of the Bush Dynasty from Watergate to Iraq.

Idiotic doings in the trial of murderer
George Zimmerman, who stalked and shot dead black teenager Trayvon
Martin in Florida as he was walking to his father's home. The
prosecutor put Trayvon's mother on the stand to identify the
recording of the screaming voice hysterically calling for help
(moments before Zimmerman executed Martin) as her son. The defense
counters with Zimmerman family members absurdly insisting the
screamer is Zimmerman.

Anybody down there in the fevered
swamps of the South ever hear of voiceprints? Voiceprints can
identify people pretty well. And surely there are existing recordings
of Martin (from voice messages, say) and there should be of Zimmerman
(if the police had done a proper job and recorded his initial
interrogation, which they probably didn't, or erased them). It's not
very high tech. The NSA has been using voiceprints for decades to
pick out people the U.S. stalks from the massive surreptitious
seizures of phone calls it conducts globally. Voiceprints uniquely
identify individuals, just as fingerprints do.

The detective who interrogated
Zimmerman in effect testified on the killer's behalf, saying he
believed Zimmerman's obvious lies. (Zimmerman has been caught lying
repeatedly since his arrest, including in court about his finances.)

Saturday, July 06, 2013

{But
first, a message from our sponsor. Well not exactly sponsor. Actually
there is no sponsor. It's really a message from the fellow who writes
this stuff...

Hello, I'm Jason
Zenith. You might know me from this blog you're reading. I've
recently made a remarkable discovery that can make your life
easier. It's called Get Notified of New Posts By Email. The way it
works is; go to the upper right corner of the page. Where it says
“Follow by Email,” type in your email. Click on “Submit.”
Then, Presto!- like magic, you get email alerts
whenever there's a new post here. It's that simple! And best of all,
it's absolutely free! Cancel at any time- there are no cancellation
fees! What could be better?

Huh? You think
World Peace and Universal Harmony would be better? Eh, maybe, a
little. Anyway this is still pretty good. And besides, we're all out
of World Peace and Universal Harmony right now- check back next
week.}

That's the least they could do to pay
the U.S. back for what its done to those two nations. The U.S. backed
a coup against the late President Hugo Chavez (and probably murdered
him).

The U.S. waged a vicious terror
campaign against Nicaragua starting under Jimmy “Cracked Corn”
Carter and through the regime of Ronald “Patron Saint of Fascists”
Reagan in the 1980s. They even murdered an American citizen, Benjamin
Linder, who was helping dig wells for the poor people of that
country. After murdering him, the fascist wing of the U.S.
establishment slimed him publicly, while the “liberal” wing
maintained silence and reportage blackout.

The U.S. blew off a multi-billion
dollar judgment by the World Court against it for its illegal attacks
on Nicaragua. (So much for their constant spouting about “rule of
law” and “rogue states.”)

President Maduro of Venezuela public
expressed his willingness to grant asylum to Snowden. (Too bad the
U.S. and its lackey nations will seize or shoot down any plane they
suspect he's flying on to get there.) President Daniel Ortega of
Nicaragua said he'd have to study the issue, so he was ambiguous.

P.S. Sick BBC says “Now Obama faces a
diplomatic headache in dealing with” Venezuela and Nicaragua. You
mean two more countries are about to get beaten up by the U.S.
Superbully, BBC. (7/6/13.) The BBC of course is the global propaganda
arm of the British “Empire.” Or the scraps of that empire that
remain. Britain now sits perched on the shoulder of the U.S., like
the pet parrot of a pirate. And parroting the U.S. line is what it
usually does.

Friday, July 05, 2013

Bolivian President Evo Morales was
flying out of Moscow after attending a conference there when in
midair the governments of Portugal and France abruptly canceled with
no justification whatsoever their permissions to overfly their
territory, forcing the plane down in Austria, where the plane was
searched for a piece of contraband by the name of Edward Snowden.
Snowden is the self-sacrificing hero who revealed to the world
certain sinister National Security Agency massive surveillance
programs targeting phone and Internet communications.

Pretty outrageous,
waylaying a national leader like he's a stray cow being lassoed.
Proud France and pathetic Portugal confirm again their status as U.S.
stooge states. (But then, the U.S. has overthrown and even killed
foreign heads of state, so this is small potatoes to these
gangsters.)

So much for respect
for national sovereignty. (Well, the numerous coups and invasions
conducted over the last two centuries by the U.S.- starting with the
invasion of British Canada in 1812- pretty much makes it naïve to
believe in national sovereignty as anything but a convenient fiction.
Of course, the U.S. isn't the only nation to ever invade another. Far
from it.)

One clear message here is how much
contempt and disrespect the U.S. has for any smaller country's leader
who refuses to be a U.S. lackey. The U.S. gives a clear choice to
every ruler of a significantly weaker country: do our bidding
voluntarily, or involuntarily. The “choice” is yours.

This is the Bully Doctrine.

The Ecuadorean people rightly took this
as an offense against their country. Aljazeera put on some Ecuadorean
citizens to express their indignation. (Something no U.S. corporate
establishment media will do, of course. It's not in their “interests”
to show the American people that Ecuadoreans, like all the people the
U.S. bullies, are people too.)

“So who cares about Aljazeera? We
bomb Aljazeera!”[1]

There's a point worth making
right there. The U.S. targets and kills journalists. Not just
Aljazeera either. [2]

When Obama announced that he wasn't
going to “scramble jets” to get Snowden, I thought, Oh, he's
drawing the line at bombing the Moscow airport. Bravo, Barack, I hail
your restraint!

But
now I think I may have been too quick to give Cool Hand Hussein
credit for moderation.

What if they think Snowden is
on a plane they can't force down? They
already blow up homes and cars all the time on suspicion of
“terrorists” inside. Sometimes they guess wrong.

If
locking up people like Snowden and Bradley Manning for life doesn't
deter future whistleblowers, the Obama regime may well resort to
assassinations. This is a regime that assassinated the teenage son of
jihadist
agitator Anwar al-Awlaki (both Americans) for no discernible reason.
And expect a new death
penalty law for revealing “classified” information “that harms
national security.”

We really shouldn't put it past the
U.S. to shoot a plane down over the ocean it suspects is carrying
Snowden. Shooting a plane down in the middle of the Atlantic would
give them “deniability.”

It's not as if the U.S. has never shot
down civilian passenger planes before. It has. And not by accident
either.

There is the infamous (or it should
be infamous at any rate) shootdown of the Iranian jetliner over
the Persian Gulf by the U.S.S. Vincennes in
1988. Saint Ronald Reagan gave the captain of the Vincennes a medal for
that crime. Officers on nearby U.S. Navy ships were shocked and
horrified witnessing the shootdown of what was an obvious civilian
airliner. The U.S. government and corporate propaganda system put out
a pack of sick lies to cover up what happened, claiming the jet was
dive-bombing and Vincennesand so on. This is all
debunked by a detailed article by a U.S. Navy officer
in the Proceedingsof
the U.S. Naval Academy, of all
places! To no avail; the propaganda is invincible, the truth is down
the memory hole. [See
“Vincennes: A Case Study,"
Proceedings Magazine,
August 1993, U.S. Naval Institute. Also “Iran Air Flight 655,”
Wikipedia.]

Thus do we have a perfect example of
official reality as total fraud.

There was TWA Flight 800, shot down by
the U.S. Navy over Long Island Sound. (Why would they do that? You'll
have to ask them. But there's no doubt they did. Either it was an
idiotic accident which they didn't want to admit to, or it was an
attempt to fabricate a “terrorist incident” which didn't quite
come off, the way painting CIA fall guy patsy Lee Harvey Oswald as a
“Castro agent” who “assassinated President Kennedy” was
intended to prompt an invasion of Cuba, but only half succeeded- the
getting rid of Kennedy half.) See the numerous articles archived at the Village Voice. [Click on highlighted text
or search at villagevoice.com for “twa 800.”] Also the Democracy
Now story, “Did U.S. Gov’t Lie about TWA Flight 800 Crash? Ex-Investigators Seek Probe as New Evidence Emerges,” at
democracynow.org.

Numerous witnesses saw a missile fired
from the sea streak up and hit the jet. The U.S. Navy was conducting
“exercises” below, and instead of steaming to the crash site ran
off the scene as fast as they could. The FBI suppressed their
evidence. Amazingly, the CIA got into the act and created a ludicrous
cartoon video purporting to “explain” the “accident.” Among
other absurdities, they actually claimed that people saw falling
flaming debris after the explosion and mistook it for a rising
missile streak before the explosion. Who do you believe, the CIA or
your lying eyes?

The FBI forced people to change their
statements. This is reminiscent of how a CIA officer inside the Los
Angeles Police Department browbeat witnesses to the Robert Kennedy
assassination in 1968 who saw the CIA conspirator in the polka dot
dress that was the trigger for the hypnotized programmed assassin
Sirhan Sirhan to fire, part of the CIA's Delta Program. (You can
actually hear the tape of the interrogation where this CIA cutthroat
detailed to the LAPD bullyrags a poor woman to retract what she saw.)
Secret policemen are good at browbeating people into falling in line
with official lies.

One plot of the U.S. “security”
establishment to get rid of Fidel Castro was to paint a fighter plane
in Cuban Air Force insignia and shoot down an American
passenger airliner over the ocean in order to blame it on
Castro and prompt a U.S. invasion of Cuba. (This became known when
internal planning documents were pried loose from the government.)

Finally there are many political
assassinations by plane or helicopter that trace back to U.S.
operatives or “interests:” the killings of Paul Wellstone, Mel
Carnahan, Francis
Gary Powers, Warren Commission member Hale Boggs (bumped off
when he started voicing doubts about that cover story fairy tale),
and Panamanian president General Omar Torrijos, an independent
populist (which is intolerable to the U.S. in “its backyard,”)
clearing the way for CIA asset Manuel Noriega to take over the
country. Also, almost Ted Kennedy, in June of 1964, only seven months
after his brother the president was eliminated by the CIA (with FBI,
Dallas PD, and U.S. military help). He survived, but the pilot and
one of Kennedy's aides did not. (Close but no cigar, CIA!)

This is a nation whose secret police
and military assassinated its own President in 1963, (as mentioned
above), and has committed many bizarre crimes over the years, so you
can't put anything past it.

Oh by the way, Ecuador found a room bug
(hidden microphone) in their ambassador's office in their London
embassy two weeks ago, the embassy where the British have effectively
imprisoned U.S. target Julian Assange. Hey, everybody does it, says
Obama and Kerry! (Do the Ecuadoreans bug the ambassadorial offices of
the U.S. and Britain? Do they bug and tap the offices and homes of
their UN personnel? I doubt it.) At the time the Ecuadorean
ambassador was negotiating with the British and kept the discovery
quiet until now to not further complicate negotiations.

1] The U.S. deliberately bombed
the Aljazeera offices in Kabul and Baghdad several times. And the
only reason Bush the Younger didn't bomb their HQ in Doha, Qatar, is
because his partner in international crime Tony Blair talked him out
of it. The U.S. also kidnapped an Aljazeera employee and locked him
up for six years at their Guantanamo Bay military torture center,
where they squeezed him for information on Aljazeera and demanded
that he be their spy inside Aljazeera in order to get out of Gitmo.
He refused, and thus was cut off from his wife and children for six
years.

We can only guess how many thousands of
less visible “dirty tricks” the U.S. inflicts on Aljazeera.
Obviously all their reporters are under constant surveillance.

Furthermore, Aljazeera is a top
priority target for the National “Security” Agency.

2] There are a number of
infamous examples of U.S. military violent attacks on journalists.
There's the infamous helicopter murder of Iraqi journalists employed
by Reuters, gruesomely recorded by the helicopter and exposed by
Bradley Manning and WikiLeaks (the “collateral murder” video).
The helicopter also murdered a father who stopped his van to aid the
men shot down in the street, and wounded his children, which the
helicopter crew chuckled grotesquely about. There's the deliberate
attack on the Palestine hotel in Baghdad in the opening days of the
Iraq invasion, killing a Spanish journalist. (A former NSA employee
has proven it was premeditated and deliberate. See “DEMOCRACY NOW! EXCLUSIVE: Fmr. Military Intelligence Sgt. Reveals US Listed Palestine Hotel in Baghdad as Target Prior to Killing of Two Journalists in 2003.” ) The U.S. military hated all journalists
who were not its “embedded” pets. There are other examples
besides.

Tuesday, July 02, 2013

Edward
Snowden, the brave but confused former NSA contractor who exposed
some of that military spy agency's nefarious activities, has friends
in the world; unfortunately they aren't particularly powerful ones.
(WikiLeaks, maybe the government of Venezuela, some sympathetic media
voices, and various citizens of the world grateful for his actions
but who are basically impotent to help him.)[1]

Right
now he's in effect a prisoner in the transit lounge of the Moscow
Sheremetyevo international
airport (presumably, unless he's in some Russian FSB interrogation
room). The U.S. quickly invalidated his passport- although Julian
Assange apparently got someone in the Ecuadorean embassy in London to
issue Snowden an unauthorized safe conduct pass, one not signed
by the consul as required. [2]

After
U.S. vice president Joseph Biden called Ecuadorean president Rafael
Correa and was friendly towards him (playing “good cop” in
contrast to the nasty “bad cop” invective heaped on Correa and
Ecuador by other U.S. politicians and the corporate media) Correa
seemed to throw Snowden to the dogs. Correa set as a condition of
granting asylum for Snowden that he somehow make it to Ecuador (a
condition that wasn't imposed on Julian Assange.) You see,
U.S. Imperialism, sometimes you can catch more flies with honey than
with vinegar.

Correa
upbraided the London consul for issuing the transit pass to Snowden,
which was revoked, said
helping Snowden leave Hong Kong for Moscow was a mistake,
and said if Snowden broke U.S. laws, he'd have to take responsibility
(code for
submit to punishment).Correa
saidthe
case was "not in Ecuador's hands".

In
another ominous comment, Correa seemed to wash his hands of Snowden:

"The
situation of Mr Snowden is a complex situation and we don't know how
he will solve it."

Notice:
how he will solve it. I.e. You're on your own, pal.

Correa
did cut off U.S. retaliatory trade threats at the knees by waiving
preferential trade rights.So
he gets to have it both ways, “standing up to the U.S.” while
actually doing what the U.S. wants (deny Snowden asylum or even a way
to move).

In fairness to
Ecuador, they've taken on enough U.S. wrath by granting Assange
asylum in their UK embassy. Some other of the 200-odd nations in the
world should step up to the plate on this one.

Assange's egomania
didn't help matters any by acting as if he was an Ecuadorean
government spokesman and obtaining an unsigned transit visit for
Snowden from the London Ecuadorean consul, apparently behind Quito's
back. Nor was it sensible for WikiLeaks to brag that they'd arranged
for Snowden to transit from Hong Kong to Moscow to Ecuador. When
you're trying to help someone who's on the lam, discretion is
advisable!

Snowden
has now thrown out asylum requests to 21 countries, spreading his
bets around in hope of getting lucky. (There
are hopeful signs from Venezuela.
President Maduro has made supportive remarks about Snowden. [3])
He withdrew his request to Russia after Putin brusquely
stated the
terms for
Russian asylum: “If he wishes to stay
here, then we have one condition: He must stop his work aimed at
harming our American partners—although it sounds very strange
coming from me.”
Indeed. But Snowden was free to leave, Putin disingenuously added.
(Trying leaving without a passport, entry visa, etc., and oh yes,
U.S. twisting arms all over the world.) [4]

One
must wonder what is going on behind the scenes between Putin and the
Obama regime. Before Putin's sudden public condition for Snowden to
stay,
one of the Democratic Party's Queen Bees, multi-millionaire Nancy
Pelosi, went on one of those U.S. Sunday morning TV shows that exist
to be platforms for the politicians the corporate propaganda
establishment has decided to make prominent, and for indoctrination
in the outlook of the ruling class on all issued, and smugly opined
that "it's
pretty good that he's [Snowden]
stuck
in Moscow airport. That's OK with me – he can stay there."So Russia is keeping Snowden on ice for the U.S. [5]

A
bit odd that China, through Hong Kong, didn't secretly offer Snowden
sanctuary in return for telling them everything he knows (and handing
over his data). Perhaps they did and Snowden turned them down.
Snowden says he is a patriot, and I have no reason to doubt him,
despite the epithet of “traitor” being hurled at him by our
lovely politicians such as Senator Dianne Feinstein et al. Snowden
has also carefully vetted what he has chosen to reveal- something the
attack dogs of the U.S. government and media establishment have
chosen to ignore.

The
U.S. is actually tending to drive him into the arms of nations it
doesn't like, such as Russia and China and Ecuador. As usual, the
hyperpower thinks it can and should get its way by sheer might.

A
smarter- and incidentally more moral and humane tack- would be to cut
a deal with Snowden for a plea to a lesser charge and maybe two years
imprisonment in return for a full debriefing on everything he took
and everything he revealed to all parties including governments, with
a guarantee of immunity from further prosecution. He has performed
a public service. But the inability of the repressive politicians
and secret police and military bureaucrats who rule the U.S. to admit
that even to themselves prevents this. Instead they hypocritically
pretend to “welcome debate” while desperately throwing the
tarpaulin of “national security” back on top of their massive
mountain of dirt. They also are obviously deeply committed to running
a total surveillance state domestically and over the entire planet,
indefinitely, and only intensifying over time. [6]

They
are lusting to sentence Snowden to life in prison, it seems, to make
an example out of him and terrorize other would-be exposers of evil
doing out of revealing anything to anyone. Many of the politicians
and the bureaucrats of repression also genuinely despise Snowden for
his “betrayal” of their secret secret police state.
(Snowden says he fears execution, but that is unlikely as large parts
of the American public would probably disapprove, even among those
who consider what he did wrong, and it's unnecessary for the
deterrent and chilling effect on others. He also fears assassination,
which if the U.S. can't extradite or kidnap him, is a future
possibility, although I think they'd rather have him alive to squeeze
out of him what, if anything, he might have revealed to the Russians
and Chinese.)

I
guess the U.S. will just have to live with the anxiety of wondering
what Snowden may have revealed to the Chinese and Russians until they
can get him in their clutches and break him. Yet another sad example
of a decent human being destroyed by the U.S. power system.

The
U.S. media has done its best to demonize Snowden. Their devilish
image has no correspondence with the real Snowden we see in the video
interviews with the Guardian.

WikiLeaks
has just posted a statement from Snowden. Part of what Snowden has to
say is moving and important:

“In the end the Obama administration
is not afraid of whistleblowers like me, Bradley Manning or Thomas
Drake. We are stateless, imprisoned, or powerless. No, the Obama
administration is afraid of you. It is afraid of an informed, angry
public demanding the constitutional government it was promised —
and it should be.” [from Wikileaks.org.]

Alas,
the majority of the American public will probably stay in their
political coma, as the corporate media is so strenuously trying to
ensure. Hopefully agitation in Europe will be greater.

1]
Snowden worked for a company called Booz Allen Hamilton, which makes
all its billions of dollars in revenues from the U.S. government,
specifically the most oppressive arms of that government. It's vice
chair is a former director of the National Security Agency, John Michael
McConnell. Merely coincidentally, I'm sure, the NSA contracted with
Booz Allen to work for it on its mass surveillance programs. Snowden
was a computer systems administrator, a self-taught computer expert
who in the technical dimension obviously has great aptitude. For McConnell's disreputable background, click McConnell.

In
most countries, agencies with the words “security” or
“intelligence” in their names are usually some kind of secret
police outfit. They spy on people, oppress people, and assassinate
people. That's true in the “free and democratic” Western bloc
too, although saying so is taboo, yet is common knowledge. And there
are ooodles of fictional books and movies showing just that as
routine, and plenty of non-fiction in the public realm about actual
crimes. But in the political realm, you're supposed to play dumb.
How's that
for social and cultural schizophrenia?

3]PresidentNicolás
Maduro: [translated from
Spanish]
“He said great truth in order to dismantle a world that cannot be
controlled, not by an American imperialist elite nor by anyone. And
these revelations that he made are the most important. A young man of
29 years who is capable of opening himself up against mechanisms of
the intelligence services, who spy and want to know everything, who
go against friends and enemies, who set up technological operations,
satellites, with the help of the Internet, telephones, to try and
control the world—the revelations of this young man have great
value. He must be protected by international human rights. He has the
right to be protected, because the United States will continue to
pursue him. The American president, the secretary of state, why are
you persecuting him? What crime has he committed? Did he kill anyone?
Did he plant a bomb and kill anyone? No. Much better, he has
prevented wars, and he has stopped illegalities being committed
against the entire world. For this, he deserves the protection of the
world. He hasn’t asked for asylum, but when he asks for it, we will
give him an answer. “

4]
Here's
a fuller- and revealing- version of Putin's
remarks:
“If
he wants to go anywhere and someone will accept him, he is welcome.
If he wishes to stay here, then we have one condition: He must stop
his work aimed at harming our American partners—although it sounds
very strange coming from me. He positions himself as a fighter for
human rights, and he is not going to stop this activity, so he has to
choose the country for himself and go to it. When it will happen, I
unfortunately do not know. If I knew, I would tell you.”
[Translated
from the Russian.]

No
dogs and human rights fighters allowed. And “unfortunately” Putin
doesn't know how long he's going to be stuck with this pest. Spoken
like the autocrat he is.

And
it's no coincidence that the autocrat and the “democratic” U.S.
political hacks see eye to eye.

5]
Pelosi is currently House of Representatives Minority Leader,
since the Democrats are in the minority there now. Previously she was
Speaker (head) of the House when the Democrats controlled that
chamber of the U.S. Congress. (For the benefit of my non-American
readers, the U.S. Congress is a bicameral legislature or parliament,
having two chambers, the House, with 435 members elected from
districts all across the U.S., and the Senate, with 100 Senators.
Each State elects two senators, regardless of population- a
profoundly undemocratic arrangement. To become law, a bill must pass
both chambers of Congress and be signed by the President.

6]
Not that I think Snowden deserves a single day in prison, it's
just that to save face the U.S. would need that. But maybe they
already have traced what he copied, or can. Maybe the NSA will or has
hacked into whatever servers his data was transferred to. I'm sure
they're inside the Guardian's servers and Greenwald's
computer, for example- the NSA has the help of their little brother
the British GCHQ to do that.

As
to the terrifying mania for repression and secrecy of the Obama
regime, and apparently the bulk of the U.S. ruling establishment, it
turns out that Obama ordered all the parts of the
Federal government to institute a draconian program demanding that
all employees spy on each other and report “indications”
that someone might give out information, regardless of whether
it's secret or not. Punishment is to be meted out not just for
“leaking” (i.e. telling the public, who pays for the government,
what the government is doing) but for failure to snitch on others and
failure to “self-report.” See “Obama’s crackdown viewsleaks as aiding enemies of U.S.” June 20, 2013, by the
McClatchy newspaper chain.

McClatchy
has distinguished itself among U.S. establishment media in recent
years for reporting things the rest of the corporate media prefers to
keep secret. Guess they just aren't cozy enough with those high level
always anonymous “officials” who like to plant self-serving
half-truths and lies in the establishment press to know any better.
Their slogan is “truth to power.” Contrast that with the NewYork Times slogan, “all the news that's fit to print.”
Obviously there's a lot the Times considers UNfit to print.
(But there is valuable info in it sometimes, if you can stand the
mealy-mouthed writing style that bends over backwards to be kind of
institutional power.)